Banned User List

Can't keep up? LOL

 

Great in theory
But I can see instances where it could harm someone who may be banned mistakenly, over something silly, etc.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not implying anyone here would ban someone wrongly. But leadership changes, some mods can be powerhungry and/or dishonest, etc.

I’m on a non BDSM site that has mods that are too strict and if any of them dont like a comment you make they threaten to ban you. I’ve also seen personal attacks in the BDSM community by “respected” “leaders” who were nothing but abusive liars.

So I think it’s best that if someon is banned that the issue stays between the site owner and reps and the individual unless there is a good reason to make it public. And then only if it’s really necesssry for the good of the site and the larger community.

 

Who decides that?

As mentioned in my other post. I’ve seen abusers make enough friends that they use their popularity for cover. They spread lies and attack those they don’t like.

So only in extreme cases do I see it helpful to share such info.

 

One would think if a person is banned from the accessing the site then all members are protected from the apple by default. No access, no interaction with members.

 

Personally, I don't think a list of banned users would do the average users any good, and having to maintain such a list would just cause an additional burden on administrators with no real benefit to anyone. If they're banned, they won't be interacting with anyone any more, so I'm not really even sure what having such a list would accomplish.

 

The only thing a ban list does is provide a roll of usernames that are inactive. I don't see that being much help to anyone.

 

Why having a list of banned accounts ?

Having a list with the name "mascara snake" on top will not help anyone when the banned account and its name could not be used again anyway....

 

I too have been an active member of a vanilla public forum and have invoked the wrath of the moderators with little in the way of explanation and even less of an opportunity to discuss why a comment by me was considered unacceptable. The mods were and probably still are very left wing with overboard PC tendencies and despite their claimed very liberal nature are in fact very dictatorial in many ways. Anyone banned or suspended by them just disappears and as general chat it not facilitated discussion of subjects of that nature get closed down very quickly.

So whilst I found it easy to agree with you at first but you sort of raised the issue yourself. If someone is banned I really do think it is important that anyone can see why. This would serve to let others know something of what is not acceptable and protects those that decided a ban was appropriate from any accusations of unfairness etc.

 

I thought not initially but if the reasons for the ban are transparent I can perceive that this might be a good thing to have a list that includes who and why. We can all then potentially learn from the mistakes of others and hopefully not repeat them.

Perhaps it should be just a list and not an open thread.. or should it?

 

I'm not sure what gain there would be.

I guess there are two types of banned individuals - ones who are banned permanently for a serious transgression, and ones who get a temporary ban for going over the top. The permanent ones are out of the equation. The temporary ones possibly deserve a chance to rehabilitate themselves, and being outed on a banned list wouldn't be conducive to doing that.

 

It might be helpful for new members to understand that members in general can be banned for certain behaviors and that it's taken very seriously. A sticky explaining why certain members were banned might help some to be more respectful if they want to play along and be part of this community. In the same light that is also why there is a charter but my guess is that most new members probably gloss right over those details and just click agree. A couple of reminders throughout the forum might end up being a positive things for the members are serious about being here and contributing.

 

I had not thought of this. I think it could depend. From my days as a Mod 99% of those banned were spammers bombarding the posts with ads for health products or whatever, and to list all these would be a total waste of time.

But other Members banned for other reasons: I know another site (GetDare) which does this and very useful as also shows date of ban and reason and whether temporary or permanent, and if former when ban will expire.

In the past there have been very few members banned. In days of MW I recall she said only three in all. A far as I know Jens only banned two: the notorious M^S and one other (now restored).

But I see that recently there have been quite few more. One I noticed (as he'd posted on one of my threads) was @SUBBYCUCKY97 and I can see no obvious reason why. I had been going to respond to him. I have also come across two others at least whose names escape me for the moment.

So for new bans, yes I do think it would be useful as the numbers are now going up. What would be even more useful is to include suspended members (as M^S was for a while) as no strike through will appear in the name and other members can know not to waste time PMing such till the suspension be lifted.

 

I wholly endorse this. CM has terms of use and it should be made clear. Foul and abusive language should be given warning first IMO but banned if persistent.

And conversely it should of course be clear that a ban will be a last resort and provided members stay within the terms of use they need have no worries at all!

 

Thanks. Though my point was a general one. But if his offence was years ago why the sudden ban only the other day?

 

My vote on that would be for a permanent ban.
Because;
attempting to blackmail any member should be a life ban
disrespecting a woman is very much against CM policy and that was blatant disrespect
and anyway I'd ban all hypocrites just for being..... and he does claim PUBLIC is a hard limit for him yet threatened to make a photograph of a member public ( and it was a face photo too)